Agenda item

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submits a report for an application under the Gambling Act 2005 for a new premises licence for BoyleSports, 259b Narborough Road, Leicester.

Councillor Pickering, as Chair led on introductions and outlined the procedure the hearing would follow.

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submitted a report for an application for a new Betting Premises Licence for BoyleSports, 259b Narborough Road, Leicester.

The applicant was BoyleSports (UK) Limited. Its representative Mr Paddy Whur, solicitor from Woods Whur, Ms Sophia Anstey, also from Woods Whur, and Mr David Wheeler, Head of Risk at Boylesports, were in attendance. Also in attendance were Lynsay Coupe, Senior Regulatory Officer, and Victoria Marshall, Senior Regulatory Officer. Mr Rob Kent was present as the objector from the local community. Also present were the Service Manager (Regulatory Services) and the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee.

Ms Coupe from the Licensing Team presented the report and outlined details of the application.

Two representations were received on 2 March 2026 from members of the public. The representations related to the prevention of gambling being a source of crime or disorder, being associated with crime or disorder or being used to support crime and the protection of children or other vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited by gambling. The representees were concerned that the proposed premises was located in close proximity to a residential area, schools and community centres. Allowing the new premises may increase financial hardship, family breakdowns and addiction in the local community and also criminal activity including theft, fraud and money laundering which in turn may affect local crime rates. They were also concerned that there were already anti-social problems in the area with men congregating and street drinking which may also increase with this premises.

Mr Kent was given the opportunity to outline the details of their representation and answered questions from Members.

Mr Whur was given the opportunity to outline the details of their representation and answered questions from Members.

All parties were given the opportunity to sum up their positions and make any final comments.

The Sub-Committee received legal advice from the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee in the presence of all those present and were advised of the options available to them in making their decision.

The Sub-Committee were also advised of the relevant policy and statutory guidance that needed to be taken into account when making their decision.

In reaching their decision, the Sub-Committee felt they should deliberate in private on the basis that this was in the public interest and as such outweighed the public interest of their deliberation taking place with the parties represented present, in accordance with the Gambling Act 2005.

The Chair announced that the decision and reasons would be confirmed in writing within five working days. The Chair informed the meeting that the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee would be called back to give advice on the wording of the decision.

The Chair then asked all but Members of the Sub-Committee and Governance Services Officers to withdraw from the meeting. Members then deliberated in private to consider their decision.

The Sub-Committee recalled the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee to give advice on the wording of the decision. The observer from Legal Services also returned at that time.

RESOLVED:

The Sub-Committee’s decision was to GRANT the Betting Premises Licence. The Licence is subject to the mandatory conditions and the default condition detailed in Appendix C of the Officer’s Report.

REASONS

In considering the application by Boylesports (UK) Ltd (t/a BoyleSports) for a Betting Premises Licence (other than track) at 259b Narborough Road, Leicester, the Sub-Committee has considered the Licensing Officer’s Report and all the representations, both written and oral. The Sub-Committee has taken account of the relevant Codes of Practice and Guidance issued by the Gambling Commission, the licensing objectives and the Council’s Statement of Gambling Policy. The Sub-Committee has taken account of all relevant legislation and has had regard to the statutory principles of good regulation and the Regulator’s Code. The Sub-Committee has decided the matter on its merits on the evidence presented to it. The Sub-Committee has had regard to the public sector equality duty detailed in section 149 the Equality Act 2010 and has taken a risk based approach to its decision which has been made on the balance of probability.

BoyleSports is the trading name of Boylesports (UK) Ltd. The premises occupy the ground floor of single story premises on Narborough Road previously used as a storage area for an adjacent supermarket. The ‘Local Gambling Risk Assessment’ submitted by BoyleSports includes a local area profile which details Schools, Youth Venues, Medical Premises, Faith Buildings, Premises licensed under the Licensing Act 2003 and Premises licensed under the Gambling Act 2005 in the area.

Section 153 of the Gambling Act 2005 places a legal duty on the Council as a Licensing Authority to “aim to permit the use of premises for gambling” in so far as the Council thinks it (a) in accordance with any relevant Code of Practice issued by the Gambling Commission (b) in accordance with any relevant Guidance issued by the Gambling Commission (c) reasonably consistent with the licensing objectives and (d) in accordance with the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy.

This ‘aim to permit’ principle is explained at paragraph 1.19 of the Gambling Commission Guidance: “The Act places a legal duty on both the Commission and licensing authorities to aim to permit gambling, in so far as it is considered to be reasonably consistent with the pursuit of the licensing objectives. The effect of this duty is that both the Commission and licensing authorities must approach their functions in a way that seeks to regulate gambling by using their powers, for example, powers to attach conditions to licences, to moderate its impact on the licensing objectives rather than by starting out to prevent it altogether.”

The Sub-Committee has considered the application on its individual merits on the evidence taking into account matters related to gambling and the licensing objectives.

Two written representations were received in opposition to the application from ‘interested parties’ one of whom attended the hearing. The Sub-Committee have taken both the written and oral representations into account in their deliberations. The representations are based on the first licensing objective of preventing gambling from being a source of crime or disorder, being associated with crime or disorder or being used to support crime, and the third licensing objective of protecting children and other vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited by gambling. No representations have been received based on the second licensing objective to suggest that gambling would be conducted by BoyleSports in anything other than a fair and open way.

The written representations are summarised in the Licensing Officer’s Report: “The representees are concerned that the proposed premises is located in close proximity to a residential area, schools and community centres. Allowing the new premises may increase financial hardship, family breakdowns and addiction in the local community and also criminal activity including theft, fraud and money laundering which in turn may affect local crime rates. They are also concerned that there are already anti-social problems in the area with men congregating and street drinking which may also increase with this premises.”

The Solicitor for BoyleSports took the Sub-Committee through his ‘Case Outline’ which helpfully set out his representations.

The starting point for the Sub-Committees consideration is the ‘aim to permit’ principle detailed in section 153 of the Gambling Act 2005.

The Sub-Committee considered the written representations in opposition to the application and listened carefully to the oral submissions, noting the obvious intensity of feeling. Although the maker of the oral submissions indicated he had spoken to others in the area who opposed the application (and surmised as to why they had not made their own representations against the application) he provided no authorisation to speak on their behalf.

No additional evidence in support of the written and oral representations in opposition to the application has been presented to the Sub-Committee.

The Sub-Committee has, as it is required to do, disregarded irrelevant matters (Gambling Act 2005 sections 153(2) expected demand and 210(1) planning or building law: Gambling Commission Guidance paragraph 5.34 moral or ethical objections and a dislike of gambling, or a general notion that it is undesirable to allow gambling premises in an area). The Sub-Committee has also been minded that the prevention of public nuisance is not a licensing objective under the Gambling Act 2005.

The Sub-Committee has noted BoyleSports’ positive and unblemished track record. BoyleSports holds an Operating Licence issued by the Gambling Commission which authorises it to operate betting shops (and bingo premises) in England, Wales and Scotland. It currently operates 75 licensed betting shops in the UK. It has 2 licences in the Isle of Man and 315 premises licences operating throughout Ireland. It has never been refused an application when applying for permission. There have been no reviews of its premises licences, either in Ireland, the Isle of Man or the UK. There have been no regulatory issues in relation to their retail units.

The Sub-Committee has been impressed with the ‘Local Gambling Risk Assessment’. This provides an assessment of the local risks to the licensing objectives posed by the provision of gambling facilities at the premises and it details the policies, procedures and control measures in place to mitigate those risks. A number of the relevant policies have been made available to the Sub-Committee. Those Policies have been ‘signed-off’ by the Gambling Commission as part of the Operating Licence issued to BoyleSports.

The Sub-Committee notes that no ‘responsible authorities’ have made representations against the application.

The Sub-Committee has found the conclusion at paragraph 18 of the ‘Case Outline’ succinct and appropriate: “The applicant’s policies and procedures and local LARA follow industry best practice and Gambling Commission Guidance. The track record of the applicant and the proposed use of the premises as a betting shop goes significantly further than “consistency” with the licensing objectives: it promotes the licensing objectives as well as any betting shop can reasonably be expected to do.”

The Licence will be issued subject to the mandatory conditions and the default condition. As the ‘Local Gambling Risk Assessment’ addresses potential risks to the licensing objectives, in accordance with the Council’s Statement of Gambling Policy, no additional conditions are appropriate: “The mandatory and default conditions that attach to all premises licences are intended to be sufficient to ensure operation that is reasonably consistent with the licensing objectives. Additional conditions will only be considered where there is clear evidence of a risk to the licensing objectives in the circumstances of a particular case that is not adequately addressed by the applicant’s local area risk assessment.”